Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Why would you assume that those "areas of intelligence" ( a spurious term made popular by members of arts faculties) are equal?
First, "areas of intelligence" is a phrase not a term. If you're going to speak ill of a series of academic disciplines, which I assume is defined by whether or not its constituents are hard sciences, then you best not feth up.
Second, the theory of multiple intelligences is hardly spurious, it has been plainly influential in defining what intelligence actually is. All you have to do is look at definitions of the concept that existed before Gardner, and those that existed after.
Ahtman wrote: It also helps to build a nice portfolio of inventions over time when your gender isn't barred from academics for huge periods of time.
It occurs to me that Testify's logic of 'look at all the inventions men managed, clearly they're smarter' is actually pretty close to the logic put forward by some of the nuttier feminists when they claim 'look at all the wars men started, clearly they're more war like'.
But are ridiculous, because both ignore the simple fact that men were the ones in position to invent things and start wars for almost all of human history.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Could anyone find statistics on the percentage of patents taken out by men and women in the United States since 2000? That would seem to be a timepoint from which the gender gap in education had closed to almost parity.
Ratbarf wrote: Could anyone find statistics on the percentage of patents taken out by men and women in the United States since 2000? That would seem to be a timepoint from which the gender gap in education had closed to almost parity.
If you want to use patents then you can't just look at education, you have to look at the gender gap in engineering and science. Liberal Arts, Psychology, Nursing, or even Mathematics don't file patents at near the rate of Engineering and Science majors. While women are actually starting to make up larger numbers on campus they are still underrepresented in those two fields. In engineering women make up 18.1% of Bachelor's degrees, and it seems that they if they make it through they tend to move on to higher degrees in the field as they make up 22.6% of Masters and 22.9% of Doctoral degrees.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/24 07:08:23
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Ratbarf wrote: Could anyone find statistics on the percentage of patents taken out by men and women in the United States since 2000? That would seem to be a timepoint from which the gender gap in education had closed to almost parity.
Most patents are taken by corporations these days, not individuals.
And given men and women don't move equally into the same fields, with men preferring more patent heavy fields like engineering, the primary difference would still be 'there's more men in engineering' than anything else.
And why would we try to use patents as a proxy for intelligence, when we have direct studies of intelligence to look at?
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
If you want to use patents then you can't just look at education, you have to look at the gender gap in engineering and science. Liberal Arts, Psychology, Nursing, or even Mathematics don't file patents at near the rate of Engineering and Science majors. While women are actually starting to make up larger numbers on campus they are still underrepresented in those two fields. In engineering women make up 18.1% of Bachelor's degrees, and it seems that they if they make it through they tend to move on to higher degrees in the field as they make up 22.6% of Masters and 22.9% of Doctoral degrees.
So I think it's safe to say that men are on average better engineers then? Seeing how we're underrepresented in everything university discipline except hard sciences, and even then we don't go into biomed as much as women do.
Ratbarf wrote: So I think it's safe to say that men are on average better engineers then? Seeing how we're underrepresented in everything university discipline except hard sciences, and even then we don't go into biomed as much as women do.
Not really. I mean, sure, on intelligence tests men do very slightly better on the whole with maths and spatial awareness, and those are important skills in engineering, but the difference is marginal, and nowhere near accounts for the gender imbalance in engineering.
Just like the number of women doing communications and journalism is way more than men, but women only score very slightly more than men in communications skills.
What people prefer to do is a way bigger determinant of what uni course they select than what they're actually best at.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/24 09:13:28
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Testify wrote: So the alternative is to believe that men and women are the same at everything? That is utterly absurd, and speaks of a highly protected upbringing.
You often make use of the false dichotomy in your arguments.
sebster wrote:
I didn't assume they were equal. That's just woeful reading on your part.
I said they were seperate, and each to be taken seperately. As such, if we have 'men are better with spatial intelligence' and 'women are better with memory' it is a complete nonsense to say 'and memory is 1.2 times more important than spatial intelligence, therefore women are smarter overall than men'.
Instead we just say 'men and women are better, on average, in different things, and it is impossible to declare one sex overall more intelligent than the other'.
I shouldn't have to be typing that out again. It was perfectly clear in my first answer. Read more carefully in future, to avoid wasting the time of both of us.
So as far as you're concerned, all types of intelligence are equal? The fact that they cannot be quantified doesn't mean they don't exist.
It takes a huge amount of intelligence to be a sportsman, for example. The ability to calculate the exact trajectory of a football requires incredible intelligence, I doubt Stephen Hawking could do it. But are footballers really as useful as astrophysists? In *any* way?
I'd also like to re-iterate, since people just love to assume I'm some trogladyte sexist, that I am fully aware that there are women who are brilliant at "male" intelligence. But feel free for you (and other posters) to assume I'm saying that I'm better than all women at everything, bla bla bla.
sebster wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Testify wrote: I would bore you with a list of male inventions but honestly there's little point. Think back to your school days and university. If you can't tell the difference between men and women, particularly on the upper end of the scale, then so be it.
Yeah, because men and women had completely equal access to economic opportunities during the Renaissance.
Seriously dude, you're making yourself look ridiculous here.
Had to do a double take here. Where did I mention the Renaissance? I talked about when YOU were at school/college. Did you go to university in 14th century Italy?
sebster wrote:
fething seriously? 100% honest you believe that?
Purely meritocratically, a 50:50 ratio in education could only be acheived by positive discrimination, yes. I believe that.
daedalus wrote:
On one hand, you have Thomas Edison, who invented being an abject dick and the concept of abusing people who made you money, but on the other hand, you have Marie Curie, who invented cancer (probably not funny, and not quite true).
Men have had more chances to invent things than women have. This much is a fact, as only as recent as a hundred years ago, women weren't really allowed to invent anything that wasn't forcefully ejected from their bodies after about nine months, and even then, most of the credit went to the male unless the result was lame or a different color.
You named a woman who made an amazing scientific discovery. Congrats! That has nothing to do with this discussion.
daedalus wrote:
Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter, I'm all for calling an axe an axe, but really? I know a woman or two much more intelligent than I am. Like, genuinely, wholly, these people can achieve things that I could only dream of. Seriously, learn the difference between gender roles and reality.
Yep. I know girls like that too. Hell, I'm a dumbass (in case you hadn't noticed). Proves nothing.
dogma wrote:
First, "areas of intelligence" is a phrase not a term. If you're going to speak ill of a series of academic disciplines, which I assume is defined by whether or not its constituents are hard sciences, then you best not feth up.
Second, the theory of multiple intelligences is hardly spurious, it has been plainly influential in defining what intelligence actually is. All you have to do is look at definitions of the concept that existed before Gardner, and those that existed after.
I don't know the difference between a phrase and a term. If you're going to get into the (soft) academic side, well done. You've won.
dogma wrote:
Its also impossible for you to prove that your bitterness doesn't stem from having been beaten by a woman in a competition for an academic seat.
My usual reaction to being beaten by a woman academically is to try to sleep with them, but nice try.
Kilkrazy wrote:
You often make use of the false dichotomy in your arguments.
If you say so.
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
Not really. I mean, sure, on intelligence tests men do very slightly better on the whole with maths and spatial awareness, and those are important skills in engineering, but the difference is marginal, and nowhere near accounts for the gender imbalance in engineering.
Just like the number of women doing communications and journalism is way more than men, but women only score very slightly more than men in communications skills.
What people prefer to do is a way bigger determinant of what uni course they select than what they're actually best at.
Well the simple fact that men seem to like it more would mean they are on average better. You could also say that men are better at video games. The fact that women don't play them as much being what makes men better on average. Is that saying that women can't be better than men in video games? No, not really, it simply means that if you were to take 100 people off of the street of each gender and have them play halo the mens team would win.
Actually, ion the halo reference, they did do a girls versus guys matchup where they made the teams up from the highest ranking members of both sexes they had access to, and the guys dommed the girls pretty hard....
Same could also be said about the majority of sports, the majority of world record holders if both sexes are pit against each other the men far ahead of the women.
Testify wrote: So as far as you're concerned, all types of intelligence are equal? The fact that they cannot be quantified doesn't mean they don't exist.
No, they're just not comparable. You keep insisting there must be some ranking given to each, and if we don't do it they must be equal.
It's like you've got a football and a squid next to each other, and you're saying 'one must be more important than the other!'. No, they're just different things. It's nice to have both of them, and as they're not in competition this is just fine.
I'd also like to re-iterate, since people just love to assume I'm some trogladyte sexist, that I am fully aware that there are women who are brilliant at "male" intelligence. But feel free for you (and other posters) to assume I'm saying that I'm better than all women at everything, bla bla bla.
I'm not saying or implying that. I am saying that trying to invent some kind of ranking of various forms on intelligence in order to rank the genders is a pointless exercise.
Testify wrote: Had to do a double take here. Where did I mention the Renaissance? I talked about when YOU were at school/college. Did you go to university in 14th century Italy?
You mentioned a list of inventions. Inventing started a long time before you, me or anyone else in this thread was in school.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Testify wrote: I'd also like to re-iterate, since people just love to assume I'm some trogladyte sexist...
No one here has any personal investment in assuming anything about you. We only have your posts as a basis for making any judgements about you or what you think. If you perceive that others view you as a sexist, then either you've successfully communicated that you are a sexist, or you've failed to communicate the opposite.
Testify wrote: I would bore you with a list of male inventions but honestly there's little point. Think back to your school days and university.
Yeah, because men and women had completely equal access to economic opportunities during the Renaissance.
Had to do a double take here. Where did I mention the Renaissance? I talked about when YOU were at school/college. Did you go to university in 14th century Italy?
When most of us think about inventions, and what we learned in school, we think about historic and important inventions that we learned about in our studies. Most of which were made by men, because for most of Western history only men had the opportunity to do so. Did you mean something else when you talked about a "list of male inventions"?
Kilkrazy wrote:You often make use of the false dichotomy in your arguments.
If you say so.
His observation powers are usually pretty good. He does a lot more reading than posting.
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++ A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
The centre of a massive brood chamber, heaving and pulsating.
Meanwhile, 3 women die every minute from domestic violence.
If anyone deserves discrimimation against them, it's men. And I say this as a male.
Squigsquasher, resident ban magnet, White Knight, and general fethwit.
buddha wrote: I've decided that these GW is dead/dying threads that pop up every-week must be followers and cultists of nurgle perpetuating the need for decay. I therefore declare that that such threads are heresy and subject to exterminatus. So says the Inquisition!
Meanwhile, 3 women die every minute from domestic violence.
And every minute hundreds of men die from man on man violence, I don't really see your point. Unless you're implying that we should care more about the significantly fewer violent deaths of females then we should males, which proves the point of this thread.
The centre of a massive brood chamber, heaving and pulsating.
Which is entirely men's fault. If it was women brutally murdering men you might have a point. But it's men brutally murdering other men. So you don't.
Squigsquasher, resident ban magnet, White Knight, and general fethwit.
buddha wrote: I've decided that these GW is dead/dying threads that pop up every-week must be followers and cultists of nurgle perpetuating the need for decay. I therefore declare that that such threads are heresy and subject to exterminatus. So says the Inquisition!
Squigsquasher wrote: Meanwhile, 3 women die every minute from domestic violence.
If anyone deserves discrimimation against them, it's men. And I say this as a male.
except, if you read the article, it definitely suggests that the way to combat domestic violence, is by teaching men what's ok to do and what's not; By more than just saying "you're an evil, slowed pig sty of a person, and you deserve nothing, because you are worthless scum". There are psychological principles that basically state that the more we (or anyone) is treated in a specific way, the more we act that way.
I reckon men can't complain too much. But we all like to imagine we are the put upon victims in our own life stories.
It certainly does seem to me that there is a bias towards women in the courts regarding custody, but then, look at the amount of child abuse and domestic violence committed by men. Perhaps the bias is there for a reason. Testosterone is a nasty hormone at times.
Thing is though, judges are supposed to be impartial. To me, this means that if there is absolutely no evidence of DV or abuse of any kind, then the custody should go 50/50. Or if the parents are fighting for sole custody, then the one who can best care for the children should get them.
Honestly, Testify, you can't POSSIBLY be crazy enough to believe that men are averagely more intelligent than women. Every single high school graduation ceremony I've been to (mine, my best friend's, my sister's, my step sister's, my step brother's) the valedictorian has been female. Is that always the case? Obviously not. And I'm not going to every HS graduation to prove my point, but of the 5 I've been to, there hasn't been a single male valedictorian. Is that proof women are smarter? No, it's a small number. But it also shows a decent example of how wrong your statement is. Men may have had more inventions throughout history, but as other posters pointed out, many women were killed or imprisoned for having ideas. You are so far back in the times and have no idea how the modern world works. 1830 is calling-they want you back home. Flying rodent gak crazy...flying rodent gak....
Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.
Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.
Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.
Squigsquasher wrote: Which is entirely men's fault. If it was women brutally murdering men you might have a point. But it's men brutally murdering other men. So you don't.
Unless you regard the lives of women as inherantly more important than the lives of men, domestic violence pales in comparison to war in terms of "evil", however you'd choose to define that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
timetowaste85 wrote: Honestly, Testify, you can't POSSIBLY be crazy enough to believe that men are averagely more intelligent than women. Every single high school graduation ceremony I've been to (mine, my best friend's, my sister's, my step sister's, my step brother's) the valedictorian has been female.
From personal experience, yeah. Your personal experience differs...that's cool, brah
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/28 15:55:04
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
Meanwhile, 3 women die every minute from domestic violence.
If anyone deserves discrimimation against them, it's men. And I say this as a male.
But do men laugh about it? I mean, when you hear about a guy getting abused by his wife it's usually taken as a joke. If a man abuses his wife it's generally seen as a very serious and disgusting event.
I think this is the right one, I'm not sure as I couldn't watch it because my internet was acting slow.
If you were to reverse the situation so that it was the man cutting off the genitalia of his wife over divorce there wouldn't be any levity in the reaction to it, and if there was the perpatrator would be seen as a sick feth.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/28 17:11:07
Meanwhile, 3 women die every minute from domestic violence.
If anyone deserves discrimimation against them, it's men. And I say this as a male.
But do men laugh about it? I mean, when you hear about a guy getting abused by his wife it's usually taken as a joke. If a man abuses his wife it's generally seen as a very serious and disgusting event.
I think this is the right one, I'm not sure as I couldn't watch it because my internet was acting slow.
If you were to reverse the situation so that it was the man cutting off the genitalia of his wife over divorce there wouldn't be any levity in the reaction to it, and if there was the perpatrator would be seen as a sick feth.
It would be interesting to discover what percentage of domestic violence incidents involve both partners being violent, particularly those stats linked to alcohol abuse. The trouble is that it's difficult to quantify what percentage of males suffer domestic abuse, especially given the ridicule and stigma society attaches to a man who is beaten by his partner.
Ugh. These talk show women in that videoclip actually got my mood down quite a bit right now. The one woman speaking up and asking them how they would feel making jokes about a woman having her breast cut off was even trying to show the rest how inappropriate this might be...but they kept cracking jokes and the audience goes with them? Meh...
I have a question, why do people put so much Importance on things like gender and ethnicity? Neither of those things make one superior or inferior to another.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/28 17:39:38
captain fantastic wrote: Seems like this thread is all that's left of Remilia Scarlet (the poster).
I'd imagine there to be a plethora of reasons, differing from subject to subject. Examples may include insecurity, innate tribalism, bad experiences or an upbringing that nurtured a narrow world view.
